Комментарии к Библии

1. But a certain man] It is not by way of contrast that the story of Ananias is put side by side with that of Barnabas, therefore much stress is not to be laid on the word But. Acts 5:36 of the last chapter begins, in the original, with the same conjunction, and it is often employed in narratives where only a simple connection of clauses is intended. Thus, Acts 8:1-3, the same conjunction occurs four times over without any adversative sense.

named Ananias] The name was common. See Acts 9:10-17; Acts 23:2; Acts 24:1. It is the same as Hananiah, Jeremiah 28:1; Daniel 1:6-7, &c., where it is the Hebrew name of Shadrach. which is spelt Ananias in the “Benedicite,” and that form of the name is found Tob 5:12. It signifies “one to whom Jehovah has been gracious.”

with Sapphira his wife] A name probably derived from the name of the precious stone sapphire, which word is found both in Hebrew and Greek.

sold a possession] The word may signify either lands, or buildings, or any kind of property. It is the word used of the young man who went away sorrowful from Jesus “for he had great possessions,” Matthew 19:22; Mark 10:22. The LXX. use it of vineyards (Hosea 2:15).

Acts 5:1-11. Account of Ananias and Sapphira

The narrative with which this chapter commences is one which none but a veracious narrator would have inserted where it stands. The last chapter concludes with a description of the unity of heart and soul which prevailed among the brethren, and expressly notices that all were filled with the Holy Ghost. But as among the twelve Apostles there was a Judas, so into the infant Church there had intruded two at least whose professions were not sincere, and who were unworthy of the gifts of grace which, with the rest, they had received. The offence of Ananias and Sapphira shewed contempt for God, vanity and ambition in the offenders, and utter disregard of the corruption which they were bringing into the society. Such sin, committed in despite of the light which they possessed, called for a special mark of Divine indignation, and to those who, likewise filled with the Spirit, knew all that had been done and why it was done, there is no shock produced by the terrible doom of the sinners, nor any language employed in the narration but the simplest and plainest. A late-compiled story would have enlarged and spoken apologetically on the reasons for such a judgment, and would not have presented us with a bare recital of facts without comment.

2. and kept back part of the price] i.e. while at the same time they professed to be bringing the whole sum into the common fund. The portion which was kept back was probably not large, for otherwise the general sense of the value of the land would have made it conspicuous. The word translated “kept back” is the same which is rendered Titus 2:10 purloining, and in classical Greek it has frequently the meaning to rob.

his wife also being privy to it] This is mentioned to shew that the offence was an aggravated one, and had not been committed without deliberation and set purpose. She was a willing accomplice in the intended fraud.

and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet] Thus professing equal devotion with all the others who were making sacrifices for the cause of the faith. We are not told what they hoped to gain by their act, whether in reputation among the people (Acts 2:47), or, by giving what was supposed to be their whole estate (which may be implied in the vague word possession), to procure for themselves in perpetuity a maintenance from the common funds. The former ambition was most probably what led to their offence. They thought more of the display made at the Apostles’ feet than of the offence before God’s eyes. And we know from St Peter’s Epistle (2 Peter 2:3) that it was soon foretold that men would arise in the Christian community, who “through covetousness would with feigned words make merchandise of” the society, and at a later date (Judges 11), these men are described as those who run “greedily after the error of Balaam for reward.” We may therefore be convinced that in the example of Ananias we have a typical instance of the kind of offence into which at this time the Christian community was in danger of being tempted.

3. But Peter said, Ananias, why, &c.] The interrogative particle is of a strengthened form in the original, and seems to indicate that there had been a possibility of resisting the influence which led to this offence, had Ananias been desirous to do so. We must believe that the Holy Spirit gave Peter knowledge of the deception which Ananias was seeking to practise on the Church, and most likely also of the punishment which should come upon the offender. Otherwise we can hardly account for the calm manner of the Apostle when such a startling judgment was inflicted in an instant.

hath Satan filled thine heart] i.e. made thee bold enough. Cp. Esther 7:5, “that durst presume in his heart,” and Ecclesiastes 8:11.

to lie to the Holy Ghost] for it was the power of the Holy Ghost that was manifested in the Apostles. It is much to be noticed how from the first the Apostles disclaim any power in themselves. It is Christ who works the miracles, the God of Abraham who gives the power of healing, and the Holy Ghost who is grieved by sins like that of Ananias. There is no trace of any seeking after consideration for themselves and their deeds among the records of these Acts of the Apostles, and no sign could be more indicative of the earliest age of the Christian Church. Before the apostolic age was past the internal character of the Church was much altered from this.

and to keep back part of the price of the land] As before, the sense is that of fraudulent concealment and purloining.

4. Whiles it remained, was it not thine own?] The verb in the original is repeated. Whiles it remained, did it not remain thine own? That is, there was no compulsion on him to sell it, the only thing expected from him being that, if he were moved to sell, he should honestly set forth what he had done. There seems to have been no necessity to give at all to the common fund unless a man felt that he could well afford to do so, nor to give all that he either had or realized by any sale, provided only he made honest declaration of what his gift really was. This is implied in the words which follow, which declare that the sum produced by any sale was at the seller’s disposal until he made it over to the common fund.

why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart?] The original is a translation of a Hebrew expression which is repeated several times in the prophet Haggai (Acts 1:5; Acts 1:7, Acts 2:18), and is rendered by the A. V. Consider. The force of the expression is “to lay anything (as a plan or a precept) deep in the heart,” and it implies long and deep deliberation on the part of this offender. It was not a case of yielding to a sudden temptation, but the plan had been accepted into the heart, and fostered there till there seemed to be a way of carrying it out. Satan had filled his heart, but he had made no effort to cast out the intruder.

thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God] It is not intended to say that Ananias had not lied unto men at all, but that the gravity of his offence was that he thought to deceive God. In Acts 5:3 it is said that the deception had been practised towards the Holy Ghost, and so we learn hence the Divinity of the third Person of the Trinity.

5. And Ananias hearing these words fell down] Smitten through the power of that Spirit whom he had intended to deceive. Here is no description of a death from apoplexy or mental excitement under the rebuke of the Apostle, but a direct intervention of the Divine power.

Terrible as this Divine judgment was, we cannot wonder that it should be inflicted, for it was so done to check that kind of offence which brought in all the troubles of the early Church, and which though they be not so punished now, when Christ’s Church has attained more firm hold on the world, yet would, if not terribly visited in these earlier days, have overthrown the whole work of the Apostles. Of a like character is the apparent severity of the penalty inflicted on Aaron’s sons, Nadab and Abihu, at the commencement of the Jewish priesthood (Leviticus 10:2); and the way in which Aaron and his family are forbidden to mourn for those whom God so punished may teach us what interpretation to put upon the judgment inflicted on Ananias and Sapphira. For they were of the members of the infant Church; they had presumed to come nigh unto God and in a wrong spirit. On them, we may conclude, some gifts had been bestowed, and in this they differed from Simon Magus (Acts 8:20) and Elymas (Acts 13:11), with whom they are sometimes compared, so that the words which God spake of Nadab and Abihu may be used of these offenders, “I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me.” We see what evils the spirit of greed and hypocrisy wrought in the Corinthian Church, even to the profanation of the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:17-21). Every good institution would have been thus perverted and, as is said of some in later times (Judges 4), they would have “turned the grace of God into lasciviousness.” The very community of goods which here was instituted for a time, was in this way perverted and turned into an argument for a community of all things, which resulted in the vices for which the Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6; Revelation 2:15) are so severely censured in the Scriptures. The death of Ananias and his wife is the finger of God interposed to save his Church from danger, just as He interposed to build it up by stretching forth His hand to heal, and that through the name of His Servant Jesus mighty works might be wrought by the first preachers.

and great fear came on all them that heard these things] In the best MSS. these things is omitted. Read “that heard it.”

This fear would deter for a while all who were not thoroughly in earnest from making profession of Christianity, a profession which the favour that had been shewn towards the society (Acts 4:33) might have induced many to make who would have been rather a hindrance than a help to the cause.

6. And the young men arose] (Lit. the younger.) Some have suggested that these were persons connected with the Church whose business it was to take charge of funerals. But it seems unlikely that, at a time when assistance had not been provided to relieve the Apostles from “serving tables” and distributing the funds to those who needed (Acts 6:1-4), there should already have been an organization for this less pressing necessity. The Greek word used here is not the same as in Acts 5:10, and this variation seems to shew that “the young men” were not in any official position, but were only the most able physically to perform such an office as is here described. On the way in which the Jews looked on attention to funeral rites see note on Acts 8:2.

wound him up] wrapped the dead body about with the robe which he was wearing at the time.

and carried him out, and buried him] We know from what took place after the Crucifixion that graves were made ready beforehand, and in the caves where the dead were deposited, as we can see from the account of the raising of Lazarus, there (John 11:43) needed little preparation, and they were closed by the simple means of a stone placed at the cave’s mouth. So that it would not need much time to complete the whole work of burial. In hot climates burial must needs follow quickly after death. Cp. the brief time which Jehu allowed to pass after Jezebel’s death (2 Kings 9:34) before he gave orders for her burial.

7. the space of three hours after] Time enough for the bestowal of the dead body, but yet so short that the news of what had befallen her husband had not reached Sapphira. It may have been that their home was in the country at a distance from Jerusalem, and that the husband alone came in to offer the money by reason of the distance.

came in] i.e. to the room where Peter and the rest of the congregation were assembled.

8. And Peter answered unto her] This use of the English verb answer, where no question has preceded and often where no remark has gone before, is not uncommon in the Bible (cp. 1 Kings 13:6; Daniel 2:14-15; Daniel 2:26; Luke 3:16), but in the present verse what St Peter says is not an answer but a question.

Tell me] The Apostle’s question might have made Sapphira suspect that their scheme was discovered, but she is as firm in her story as her husband had been.

whether ye sold the land for so much?] i.e. and no more. St Peter mentioned the sum which Ananias had brought in, or perhaps it was lying on the ground where he had put it at the first.